Category Archives: national news

She plays a doctor on TV news shows

Katrina Pierson blamed an earpiece for an earlier gaffe.

I don’t think she can rely on that dodge for this one.

Pierson is a Texan who serves as a spokeswoman for the Donald J. Trump presidential campaign. She told a TV interviewer recently that the Afghan War began on President Obama’s watch.

Oops! Uh, no, Ms. Pierson. It began on President Bush’s watch, right after 9/11. She said she misunderstood the question and couldn’t hear it properly because of chatter on her electronic earpiece.

OK, whatever you say.

Now, though, she has diagnosed a medical condition in her hero’s Democratic opponent for the presidency, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Pierson said Clinton suffers from dysphasia, a rare brain disorder.

Double oops!

You see, Pierson isn’t a doctor. She is a failed congressional candidate. She is a flack for the Republican presidential nominee. She now has tossed a lead weight on the innuendo being tossed around about Clinton’s physical health and taken it to a new depth.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/18/trump-spokeswoman-diagnoses-hillary-clinton-with-dysphasia-despite-not-being-doctor/

Of course, though, Trump won’t disavow her “diagnosis.” He won’t take her to the proverbial woodshed. He will allow such nonsense to bounce around throughout social media.

Sometimes politicians — and their spokespeople — tend to speak about matters of which they have no direct knowledge.

Do you remember when Terry Schiavo, the comatose patient whose family sought permission to let her “die with dignity,” was in the news? A senator, Bill Frist, offered a medical diagnosis that sought to support his contention that Schiavo should be kept alive.

Let’s understand that Frist, a Tennessee Republican who’s no longer in the Senate, is a noted transplant surgeon. However, he never examined Schiavo, so he was unable to offer anything close to a precise diagnosis of her medical condition.

Now we have someone else — with even less knowledge of medical matters — going on the air and saying some truly thoughtless, careless and ridiculous things about a major-party candidate for the presidency of the United States.

I have a simple request of Katrina Pierson: Don’t talk about things about which you know nothing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4mB714-8K0

 

Trump loses ‘brown-skinned’ supporter

trump_supporter_cnn

Another mystery has emerged along the Donald J. Trump presidential campaign trail.

It involves a young man who supported the Republican presidential nominee. The young man, Jake Anantha, attended his first-ever political rally in North Carolina the other day.

Then he got tossed out. Trump’s security boss booted out Anantha for — and this is Anantha’s version of it — no apparent reason.

Anantha, whose father is of Indian descent, says he got tossed because he has “brown skin.”

Anantha said he tried to explain to the Trump security goon that he was just there to listen to his guy, Trump, and that he is a supporter. The security guy didn’t believe him, Anantha said. So he kicked him out.

Why is this a bigger deal than usual? Well, Trump keeps saying he’s going to win 95 percent of the African-American vote, despite only polling about 1 percent among black voters at the moment. Anantha, though, contends he was thrown out of Trump’s rally only because of the color of his skin.

How is Trump’s outreach to people “of color” going to work in that context?

Granted, we’ve only heard Jake Anantha’s version of the story. Not a peep has come just yet from the Trump campaign. The security guy isn’t talking. Neither is the candidate. Same for Trump’s new campaign CEO, Steve Bannon, who came to the campaign after posting some seriously racist-sounding commentary while working for Breitbart.com. Is there a connection? Hmmm. I don’t know.

Some answers, please. Mr. Trump? Mr. Security Guy? Anyone?

Oh, there’s one more thing.

Jake Anantha no longer supports Trump.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/292069-trump-supporter-says-he-was-kicked-out-of-a-trump-rally

POTUS set to tour Louisiana flood zone

louisiana-floods

Well, here you go.

President Obama has said he’s going to Louisiana next week to see first hand the damage caused by the historic flood.

I’m glad to know he’s going to size it up in person.

Yes, I wrote that he should go. Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump and his running mate, Mike Pence, made a show of it today by venturing to the flood zone. They went despite being asked to stay away by Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards.

It’s interesting to me that candidates can do nothing to help. They do manage to score some political points, which Trump sought to do.

Presidents, though, do bring loads of gravitas to such visits.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/obama-louisiana-flooding-visit-227209

For that reason, I’m glad Barack Obama is going to fulfill an unwritten but always understood job requirement. It is to be the comforter in chief. Obama is good at it.

Lord knows he’s had enough experience embracing grieving Americans caught in the midst of crisis.

https://highplainsblogger.com/2016/08/president-ought-to-take-a-look-at-the-flood-damage/

 

 

A kinder, gentler Trump set to emerge … but wait!

manafort

Paul Manaford quit the Donald J. Trump presidential campaign three days after getting kicked out of his job as campaign CEO.

There appear to be some potentially difficult legal issues for Manaford to navigate. But I digress.

The issue today is how the Republican presidential nominee becomes a new man, a new candidate.

Honestly, this is all quite confusing.

Steve Bannon is the new CEO. Kellyanne Conway is the new campaign manager. Conway says she dislikes the personal insults that Trump has hurled throughout his campaign. Bannon, though, is a rough-and-tough character known for his take-no-prisoners style.

Trump has said publicly he plans “no pivot.” He’s not going to change his style.

OK, then.

How does his campaign get traction? How does he become a more “focused” and potentially gentler candidate for the U.S. presidency? His expression of “regret” over the “personal pain” he caused rings — to my ears — as hollow as his assertion that he’s going to “work for you.”

Moreover, how does he make these changes without pivoting … and without the public forgetting those astonishing utterances that have poured out of Trump’s mouth during the GOP primary campaign?

I won’t recite them here. You’ve heard ’em all. They fired up the GOP base. They’re still in Trump’s corner. What about the rest of the general election voters, though, who need convincing that Trump is their guy?

Trump’s campaign has gone through a remarkable set of changes in its high command quite late in the process of electing a president. They all seem to suggest a campaign in serious disarray.

And, oh yes, we have that organization issue to be resolved.

Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton has put — if you’ll excuse the ridiculous euphemism — “boots on the ground” in all 50 states. She’s got precinct chairs, workers, campaign staff, volunteers — and maybe even their pets, for all I know — lined up to work for her election. Trump? He’s got next to no one filling those essential line jobs in the field.

I’m waiting to see if Trump assumes Americans are as gullible and malleable as he hopes. My sense is that voters — those of us far beyond the GOP base — aren’t going to forget the lengthy string of insults and innuendo that propelled this guy to his party’s presidential nomination.

President ought to take a look at the flood damage

491294-louisiana-flood-reuters

I am one of those who believes Barack Obama should take day away from his vacation to do something quite presidential.

He ought to take a jet ride south from Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., to tour the flood damage of Louisiana. He ought to spend just a bit of time talking to local residents, local officials, state officials and his Homeland Security staff to get an up-close look at Mother Nature’s fury.

Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards has said he’d rather have the president wait before going there.

Look, this isn’t written into the president’s job description. It’s understood, though, that when Americans are hurting their head of state sometimes gets called upon to offer personal words of comfort, love and support.

A historic flood, to my mind, counts as one of those times.

Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post makes an interesting argument that the president famously doesn’t always do things just because they look right.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/18/heres-why-president-obama-isnt-stopping-his-vacation-to-visit-the-louisiana-flooding/

I get that, too.

However, this president did join the amen chorus of critics in 2005 when President Bush staged that noted flyover during in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, which wiped out much of New Orleans. The critics all said Bush needed to set foot on the ground and the flyover became something of a symbol of alleged presidential nonchalance about the suffering that befell one of America’s great cities.

Cillizza writes: “Presidents don’t get vacations — they just get a change of scenery,” Nancy Reagan famously told critics of her husband’s regular trips to the family’s ranch. Work, especially in this digital age, follows you around.

I get that, too.

Presidents, though, assume the role of “comforter in chief.” Obama has performed that role masterfully many times during his two terms in office. Whether he’s embraced family members of those slain in spasms of violence or gone to natural disaster sites — such as when he went to the Jersey Shore after Super Storm Sandy devastated that region — he’s been there.

Some folks in Louisiana need comforting right now.

Innuendo machine getting cranked up again

trump and babies

Donald J. Trump has shaken up his Republican presidential campaign high command.

Many GOP experts are saying the same thing: Steve Bannon’s ascent to campaign CEO and Kellyanne Conway’s promotion to campaign manager means that they plan to “let Trump be Trump.”

Good. Bring it!

So what are we hearing now from the GOP nominee?

It’s that Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic nominee, is too ill to be president. She doesn’t have the stamina. She doesn’t have the intellectual goods. Clinton takes too much “time off.” She “takes naps” after appearing at national campaign events.

The innuendo machine is being re-fired.

That develop, I suggest, is one of the results of Trump being Trump.

Will this campaign tactic stick? Will the GOP nominee be able to ride this fundamental lie to victory? Count me as one who doubts it seriously.

Many of those GOP “experts” also say Bannon’s promotion portends a disaster for Trump and the party he is leading. He’ll be able to solidify his GOP base, but will fail to expand that base to include independents, frustrated Democrats or even “establishment Republicans” who detest the idea that Trump is their party’s flag carrier.

The innuendo, though, about Clinton’s health will make headlines.

It also will give the Democratic nominee some ammo I’m quite certain she’s going to fire back at Trump when the two of them meet for their joint appearance.

Feds nix private prisons … good!

prisons

I have long disliked the idea of privatizing the prison system.

Whether it’s state prisons or throughout the federal system, the notion of turning the incarceration of convicted criminals over to for-profit business simply strikes me as wrong.

The U.S. Justice Department has decided to end its relationship with private prison companies … to which I offer a hearty cheer.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/justice-department-says-it-will-end-use-of-private-prisons/ar-BBvMrqX?ocid-ansmsnnews11

“They simply do not provide the same level of correctional services, programs, and resources; they do not save substantially on costs; and as noted in a recent report by the Department’s Office of Inspector General, they do not maintain the same level of safety and security,” Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates wrote.

I am not going to challenge any of that here.

I simply want to say — as I’ve noted before over many years in journalism — that my opposition to private prisons rests mainly as a matter of principle.

We ask our police departments to protect us from criminals; we pay officers’ salaries with our tax money. We ask the state and county district attorneys to prosecute suspects; we pay them for that, too. We then demand justice in our courts; and we pay judges’ salaries as well.

Then, when criminal defendants are convicted, we are able to farm out their incarceration to private businesses? The way I see it — and I’m open to discussion on this — the state has an obligation to finish the job that public entities began back when the suspect is arrested and charged with committing a crime.

That job ought to include keeping these individuals locked up. It also ought to include full public scrutiny of the job they are doing — on our behalf.

Texas hands over a fair amount of its incarceration responsibilities to private firms. I don’t expect the state to follow the feds’ lead in getting rid of private prisons.

However, I always can hope.

Should ‘short-circuited’ remain a talking point?

Clinton-and-Trump

A former colleague of mine scolded me once a few weeks ago over my criticism of Donald J. Trump’s gaffe when he referred the Apostle Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians as “2 Corinthians.”

My critic reminded me that people who speak for a living could be excused for saying things improperly on occasion. He made an interesting and thought-provoking point.

So, I’m left to wonder about Trump’s opponent in the presidential campaign, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who said she “short-circuited” when answering questions about the e-mail controversy that continues to dog her.

She’s been pilloried for the statement by her foes, led by Trump, who’s now questioning whether Clinton’s got the intellectual snap she needs to be president of the United States.

Trump and Clinton will square off soon in the first of three joint appearances. It’s seems a good bet that Trump will bring up the “short-circuited” comment. He’s hired a new campaign CEO and manager, both of whom vow to “let Trump be Trump.”

Is the criticism of Clinton fair? Or did she — as a politician who makes her living these days talking constantly — merely say something in a less-than-artful manner?

As my ex-colleague/critic reminded me: He knows “how easy it is to say something wrong and even incredibly stupid despite knowing better.”

Politicians, though, usually aren’t allowed — for better or for worse — the luxury of a simple misspeak.

By all means, release the documents

BBvKoqL

There appears to be a capital idea in the making.

The unclassified material related to the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server while she was secretary of state might be released for public review.

Yes, release them. Let the public see the documents. Let the public review them and let the public decide whether the Democratic candidate for president has earned the right to occupy the office she seeks.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/documents-from-the-hillary-clinton-email-investigation-might-be-made-public/ar-BBvKqCm?li=BBnb7Kz

Republicans all across the country have been making a great deal of those e-mails and Clinton’s use of the private server. They are mighty unhappy that FBI Director James Comey decided against recommending prosecuting Clinton, that she didn’t commit a crime.

Well, now some GOP members of Congress want to pursue perjury charges against the Democratic presidential candidate.

Let’s take a look at the documents.

Hasn’t Clinton actually expressed support for public release of them?

I don’t think Clinton committed a crime and I support the FBI’s conclusion on that matter.

I also believe in full transparency. So, let’s separate the classified documents from the unclassified papers. Release them to the public and let the public decide the fate of this investigation — for which the public paid a lot of money.

Will it open up a whole array of political discussion and debate? Sure it will. That’s what happens in the middle of a presidential election.

This campaign is running on all cylinders?

A woman holds signs depicting the head of Republican presidential candidate businessman Donald Trump as she waits to enter the auditorium to hear him speak, Wednesday, Aug. 19, 2015, at Pinkerton Academy in Derry, N.H.  (AP Photo/Mary Schwalm)

Someone will have to help me out, make me understand something that’s gone over my head.

Donald J. Trump has just brought in his third campaign chairman in the past eight weeks. He’s demoted the guy who had the job the day before yesterday. The new man in charge, a fellow named Steve Bannon, comes from a rightwing website, Breitbart.com.

The Republican presidential nominee also hired longtime GOP pollster Kellyanne Conway as his new campaign manager.

The Trumpkins say “not to worry. The campaign is going great! We’re going to finish so, so strong. Donald Trump is going to win!”

Really?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump%e2%80%99s-new-campaign-manager-kellyanne-conway-doesn%e2%80%99t-like-his-name-calling/ar-BBvJvgH?li=BBnb7Kz

Well, Trump doesn’t have any organizations established in the key battleground states. There appears to be no one handling what’s known commonly as the “ground game,” which involves recruiting volunteers for get-out-voter drives and targeting key precincts.

He’s trailing Democratic opponent Hillary Rodham Clinton in every one of those key states. In some of them the deficit is in double digits.

What am I missing?

How does a candidate go from Corey Lewandowski to Paul Manafort to Steve Bannon as campaign chairs in eight weeks and still pretend to have all his oars in the water?

Moreover, reports are surfacing about growing panic within top Republican circles. Does this assuage that panic?

I do not believe it does.